| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/24/2008 03:16:03 PM · #1 |
So a friend of my sister is getting married next april and has asked if I would be interested in doing the photos. I could do with some advice - I understand that with the equipment and experience I have at the moment I'm pretty sure it would be impossible for me to do a good job. She's happy that I've never done anything like this before and is apparently looking for a more candid approach to the occasion (as opposed to set lists of photos and hours of standing around).
So the questions I have are as follows - what is the basic kit that I would need to pull of something like this? Could someone point me towards literature on the subject? Am I out of my mind even considering doing this?
I'm a student so my budget is pretty minimal - I'm seriously considering upgrading my body (D300 in mind) anyway. After this I assume I need something like a 50mm and a good quality zoom at the very least. I have an SB-600, will this be enough?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated, I have a year to put all this together so any suggestions for things I can do between now and then would be great.
Cheers, J |
|
|
|
04/24/2008 04:26:24 PM · #2 |
What style of photography are you going for? Old school can be done with just about anything cause it's primarly posed and direclty lit with on camera (bracket) flash.
Today's brides want the more candid, less posed, more natural photos - and that takes fast lenses and high ISO - cause you're not using flash much if at all. Drive mode is used to make sure you get that 'candid' look - the good expression not the half blink, half yawn looking part of a laugh.
The top PJ shooters run 2.8 lenses or faster primes and 1D3 or similar bodies - good high ISO and fast focus, fast drive modes. 3FPS won't do.
Assuming you don't want to go too complicated and artsy, you can skip fisheyes and lensbabies and the like. A long fast lens is great for sitting back on the sidelines and snapping candids - 70-200 2.8 IS/VR is an excellent choice. And yes, you'll need IS/VR A 70-300 'consumer' lens is NOT fast enough - you'll be trying to shoot at 5.6 and that's too dark unless it's at outdoor wedding / reception.
95% of the time if the couple isn't willing to spend the money on photography it's because they don't value photography - it's not about affording it. If it was important to them they'd find a way to pay for it. I've shot weddings where the DJ cost more than me, or the flowers cost more, or the cake cost as much - and the pictures last forever while the other things are gone in a few hours.
The formal shots in the church are more for the ego of the family than for anything else. To be included in the formals is to be recognized as important to the couple - rarely does anyone buy/print the formals. But they do expect you to take them, pose them well, light them well, etc.
|
|
|
|
04/24/2008 04:55:15 PM · #3 |
There a tons of thread on weddings in the forums and in each  Prof_Fate gives similar sage advice... listen to him, cause he's bang on. and if you don't believe it find one of the recent threads by me :)
you've got a year, if you're serious I get some fast glass as the very least and practice lots with it. to do a wedding you camera and lens have to be an extension of your body, and just as familiar. you're not going to have time to fiddle with settings as you'll risk missing an important moment.
Also look up other wedding photographers, look at their portfolios and see the kind of stuff they're doing. you bride will be doing the same and will want her pictures to look just like the ones on the website (regardless of how much she's paying).
|
|
|
|
04/25/2008 09:38:25 AM · #4 |
Ok this is brilliant advice guys thanks so much. This girl is indeed looking for a more casual candid setup I think so this is a real help.
I now need to figure out where to get the £4000 odd pounds I need for the bodies and glassware... I might rob a bank.
Is it fair to ask for money for this shoot? I feel I shouldn't because i'm not really a pro and I can't particularly guarantee a product - but then again this is likely to cost me an absolute fortune (Nikon doesn't do a student discount!). Of course I'll have the kit for other things but is it normal to charge in a situation like this? |
|
|
|
04/25/2008 10:01:39 AM · #5 |
IMO, even though you don't have much experience, you will regret doing it for free. When your sitting at your PC days after the wedding, processing photo's for hours on end, you'll ask yourself the question, "why in the world am I doing all this work for free?" That was my experience anyway.
If you want to charge them less because of your in-experience, that's fine, but you should at least charge for your time. |
|
|
|
04/25/2008 10:07:12 AM · #6 |
Something to think about: in our society we generall ascribe value to something by home much it cost. things that are expensive are (again in general) more valuable. Photography is no different... Do your work for free and the value that they will ascriibe to that will be equal.
I wont say home much to charge, the really depends on many things like what is the going rate in your area and what is the final product you will be giving them. at the very least I would say that you want to cover costs. |
|
|
|
04/25/2008 10:40:35 AM · #7 |
OK great, i'll look into how much the pros go for and knock off a large portion. Hours of PP will be lame - especially as that time next year is when I'll be doing University finals.
Thanks again all! |
|
|
|
04/25/2008 11:19:43 AM · #8 |
Charge or not? Hard to say. I'm not a dentist, but would you pick me to pull a bad tooth of yours? If so, why? If so, would you pay me, want to pay me, and what results would you expect? You'd certainly not expect the same pain free results you'd get from a professional dentist and you'd not expect to pay as much.
In the old days no one shot for friend's for free - film cost money, developing cost money, etc. So even if you don't place a dollar value on your time, knowledge, etc or care that you're gear is wearing out and at risk for breakage and theft and think digital is free (and a CD only $1) then consider that these pictures will have value to the bride and groom. They are starting a new family and this is the first thing that goes in that family album, so to speak.
You want/need $4000 in gear, and will spend the next year learning, trying things, etc. The wedding will take 8 hours to shoot plus prep time and travel, backing up and whatnot afterwards. If all you do is turn over the captures (aka proofs) then you might have 11 hours in the wedding itself. Ask yourself if you are willing to do that for 'fun'?
Yeah, to you it's fun and most of us do fun things for free. I cook my dinner and don't get paid, and some people love to cook - but few people will cook dinner for me for free. Same for washing my car or cleaning my house or putting my family pics in an scrapbook album. I've been doing a lot of work on my house this past few weeks. I've offered beer and pizza to friends but it seems no one is much interested in helping me build a shed or paint my porch. I guess it's no fun for them. While shooting a wedding is slightly more fun than replacing a kitchen floor, would you do any of these other things for free for this friend of your sister's?? Probably not.
Also consider that once you charge you're a professional in the eyes of the law and all that goes with that - legal liability for anything that might go wrong, etc. The emotional responsibilty of not 'ruining the wedding pictures' you've got either way.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2008 11:59:56 AM · #9 |
Hi Jimi,
The advice here is sound. For what it's worth, I'm an enthusiastic amateur like you and did my first wedding in September. I still use a couple of D70s as I was waiting for the D3 launch and now I'm scrimping and saving good style! To start, I bought a second hand spare body and an F3 in the boot. I have the 18-70 kit lens, which is a great all-purpose lens but needed compensation for lack of speed with a higher ISO in low light, and the standard 70-300 f4.5-5.6 as base kit. I did however reach the conclusion that fast glass was key so the cheapest way I found was to get a wide angle prime (24mm f2.8) for ceremony shots inside and some of the main groups. I also got a 85mm f2.8 for the pre-wedding details of the dress (this was going to be in low light), closer portraits, speeches and the evening do. I did a full day's coverage on these four lenses and because I couldn't stretch to a fast zoom (ideal when working alone), I was swapping lenses between the two bodies as required. The key here is planning; make sure you know the core shots the couple want and aim to get them by planning ahead and working as smoothly as you can. It's all about planning and knowing your gear (even in the dark!) I have another three weddings lined up this year for close friends on the back of the shots I did for September so think carefully about what you need if you are indeed on a tight budget. Try e-bay or ffordes photographic for new or second hand gear.
As for the money side of things, I would say that I won't do another wedding for free aside from the ones this year to build my portfolio. The reason is that the people are either family or very close friends and it is my wedding gift to them. I spent weeks converting files for the September couple (she was a work colleague) and barely got a thank you and never see them anymore, which is disappointing. For a friend of your sister, I'd do some market research and price yourself in at the lower end of the market, say £300 for the day or something for a CD and 10 prints. Depends on your skill level and how much the couple value the shoot. See Prof Fate's comment again. Anyway, it's quite a rush so good luck and have fun! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 12:00:18 AM EDT.
